Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Nessus
Dec 22, 2003

After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!



Mister Macys posted:

Fair enough, but for a stump speech?
How many of those people were already well aware of Bernie Sanders and his message and basically went to hear the gospel preached?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

funtax
Feb 28, 2001
Forum Veteran

Mister Macys posted:

Seriously, who was the last candidate to fill a ten thousand seat stadium a year and a half out from the election?

Ron Paul filled large venues regularly running up to 2012, including prior to the primaries. It was one of the reasons his followers were so convinced that there was a secret wellspring of support for him out in the general population, when instead it just tended to be a situation where 100% of Ron Paul's supporters showed up any time he was in town.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfrNz_2hvvM

In 2000, Nader held rallies all over the place that routinely topped 10,000 attendees. Those weren't a year+ out from the election, of course, but they started pretty much as soon as his campaign officially began.

The X-man cometh posted:

She didn't release the number, but the crowd at Hillary's announcement on Roosevelt Island was probably over 10,000, especially since there were people standing outside the fence listening in.

Her campaign estimated 5500.

funtax fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Jul 6, 2015

Supraluminal
Feb 17, 2012

The X-man cometh posted:

She didn't release the number, but the crowd at Hillary's announcement on Roosevelt Island was probably over 10,000, especially since there were people standing outside the fence listening in.

Sheng-ji Yang posted:

I read it was around 4,500.

I've seen 5,500 more frequently, but either way, yes, it wasn't close to 10,000. Also, many reports of the rally specifically mentioned the overflow area was mostly empty. For reference, Sanders' campaign kickoff drew 5,000 people.

However, comparing crowd sizes at this point, especially in a vacuum, is not very informative. Even assuming lackluster public support, if Clinton wanted to pack 10 or 20 thousand people into a stadium, she could make it happen by sheer dint of promotional effort (i.e. spending money on advertising, organizing, etc.). She has the name and the resources to do it. Evidently her campaign either doesn't think it matters enough or actively doesn't want to pursue it right now in keeping with their attempts to avoid the coronation narrative.

So I don't think crowd counts tell us much about Clinton vs. Sanders. However I do think they're one data point to consider in terms of assessing Sanders' basic degree of viability: If he were struggling to draw people, it would be a very bad sign. As it is, we see that there is at least a reasonable degree of interest and enthusiasm for him in the areas he's campaigned.

That's not nearly enough by itself to win the nomination, but it's a piece of the puzzle. If Sanders can bring in enough resources, use them effectively, maybe pry away a fragment of establishment Democrat support, and generally get a few lucky breaks, on top of the public enthusiasm... then maybe he has a fighting chance.

Raskolnikov38
Mar 3, 2007

We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold
Didn't Hillary's overflow area also have some anti-Hillary protesters in it? I recall a handful of them showed up to the event, no idea if they stuck around.

funtax
Feb 28, 2001
Forum Veteran
There is a 100% chance that there are anti-Hillary people anywhere Hillary appears.

GalacticAcid
Apr 8, 2013

NEW YORK VALUES
Prepare for the Fight of the Century.

Nintendo Kid
Aug 4, 2011

by Smythe

Mister Macys posted:

Fair enough, but for a stump speech?

What about it dude? 10,000 people will come out for fuckin high school football if you live somewhere lovely enough.

whydirt
Apr 18, 2001


Gaz Posting Brigade :c00lbert:

Which of those hands is a rapist?

AARP LARPer
Feb 19, 2005

THE DARK SIDE OF SCIENCE BREEDS A WEAPON OF WAR

Buglord

AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 03:47 on Jan 22, 2016

Agrajag
Jan 21, 2006

gat dang thats hot
Someone tell me what the gently caress is up with Trump's 24/7 duck face, and why hasn't this issue been addressed before itt?

This poo poo is important.

Job Truniht
Nov 7, 2012

MY POSTS ARE REAL RETARDED, SIR

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

That does't translate into money, votes, or support.

That doesn't, but being a recipient of CitiGroup, BoA, and Goldmann Sachs donations sure does!

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Do Not Resuscitate posted:

The angry freakouts in this thread caused by anything perceived to be remotely positive vis-à-vis the Sanders Campaign are hilarious.
Calling them angry freakouts is a mite excessive. A lot of people in this thread are going to vote for Bernie in the primary and hope he does well. Some of those same people are irked by "Bernie or No One" sentiment.

Monkey Fracas
Sep 11, 2010

...but then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you!
Grimey Drawer

Hair of Fate

Zaphod42
Sep 13, 2012

If there's anything more important than my ego around, I want it caught and shot now.

Agrajag posted:

Someone tell me what the gently caress is up with Trump's 24/7 duck face, and why hasn't this issue been addressed before itt?

This poo poo is important.

We're just so used to seeing old Donald Duck that we don't even notice it anymore. But yeah, he does that constantly.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
It's a fundamental part of Trump's eternal sneer.

ToxicSlurpee
Nov 5, 2003

-=SEND HELP=-


Pillbug

Agrajag posted:

Someone tell me what the gently caress is up with Trump's 24/7 duck face, and why hasn't this issue been addressed before itt?

This poo poo is important.

He is a very serious man with very serious things to say but nobody seems to want to listen so he has to scrunch up his face and yell a lot.

Evil Fluffy
Jul 13, 2009

Scholars are some of the most pompous and pedantic people I've ever had the joy of meeting.

Brannock posted:

Women consist half of the population, black people are like 13% and typically segregrated from conservative social circles. The misogyny and outrage will be there but they won't be able to be remotely as overt about it as they were with Obama.

You're talking about the party that can't help but talk about rape and has politicians who see rape babies as gifts from God.

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

Hillary's VP will be a milquetoast white dude. Terry Mac, O'Malley, Evan Bayh, Warner, Jack Reed.

Doubtful. There's nothing gained by having any of those people as VP. The reason I keep mentioning Julian Castro is because he checks off a lot of boxes Hilary doesn't as he's a young, charismatic, Hispanic politician and if he wants to be President one day then she (and Bill) get to potentially play Kingmaker with him when she leaves office and he runs. Isn't Terry Mac also toxic as gently caress? Why would Clinton want someone like him as her VP? It'd be like Jeb getting the nomination and deciding to go back to Florida to pick Voldemort for his VP.

Though Rubio getting picked as VP if he doesn't get the nomination seems more likely that Castro being picked by Hilary. If both tickets lack a Latino face I'd be surprised; especially the GOP because they definitely need to do something to pull in Latino voters to have any shot at winning. Unless the Castros hate the Clintons and vice-versa, but if they do I haven't seen any articles mentioning it.

Plus I kinda want to see Castro as a VP for Hilary because if he fits the role well and a Hilary presidency does decently the GOP would be in a pretty bad place to take him on in 2020 or 2024 since he'd have a lock on Latino voters even if the GOP base doesn't go even further off the Freep end. It's a shame Hilary is in love with Israel because if there's one thing I really like with Obama is that he's far less likely to put up with their poo poo than and other president has been for awhile.

computer parts posted:

I have yet to see evidence that PA is a real swing state. I'm going off of this map:



Which from what I can see just requires Florida to win.

Wisconsin will be blue barring some sort of GOP sweep. I'd say it's about 80:20 that Virginia goes blue as well even if Clinton can only rid demographic changes. Ohio's iffy because the GOP there is still loving with poor/minority voters as much as they can get away with. Florida might go blue unless Voldemort gets voting hours cut even more to the point that you can basically only vote during normal work hours.

If the Dems don't take at least 2 of Ohio/Wisconsin/Virgina/Florida it's because they're about to lose huge to some massive GOP wave. Even if they only got Ohio and Virgina they'd have have to lose every single other state labeled Undecided on that map and I really don't think the GOP can gently caress with the election that heavily and not get caught. A Jeb/Rubio ticket could make Florida very hard for the Democrats to win too.

pugnax
Oct 10, 2012

Specialization is for insects.

Zaphod42 posted:

We're just so used to seeing old Donald Duck that we don't even notice it anymore. But yeah, he does that constantly.



Needs more dick.

Cythereal
Nov 8, 2009

I love the potoo,
and the potoo loves you.

Evil Fluffy posted:

Florida might go blue unless Voldemort gets voting hours cut even more to the point that you can basically only vote during normal work hours.

Also depends on whether our Supreme Court gives a gently caress about active and direct voter suppression on election day in Hispanic majority areas. They sure didn't during the governor's election.

FAUXTON
Jun 2, 2005

spero che tu stia bene

Agrajag posted:

Someone tell me what the gently caress is up with Trump's 24/7 duck face, and why hasn't this issue been addressed before itt?

This poo poo is important.

it's the face one makes when they're exclaiming "YOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOJEST MOST LUXOOOOOOORIOUS."

Joementum
May 23, 2004

jesus christ

computer parts posted:

Reminder that Nixon and Eisenhower are as "related" as Hillary and Bill are.

Moreso, actually. Nixon and Eisenhower's kids married.

Joementum
May 23, 2004

jesus christ
The ESPN Celebrity Golf Classic has been moved from Trump National Golf Club to Pelican Hill Golf Club.

Meanwhile, Trump has issued a statement on how much of a not-racist he is.

quote:

I don’t see how there is any room for misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the statement I made on June 16th during my Presidential announcement speech.

Here is what I said, and yet this statement is deliberately distorted by the media:

“When Mexico (meaning the Mexican Government) sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you (pointing to the audience). They’re not sending you (pointing again). They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems to us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people! But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting. And it only makes common sense. They’re sending us not the right people. It’s coming from more than Mexico. It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably from the Middle East. But we don’t know. Because we have no protection and we have no competence, we don’t know what’s happening. And it’s got to stop and it’s got to stop fast.”

What can be simpler or more accurately stated? The Mexican Government is forcing their most unwanted people into the United States. They are, in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc. This was evident just this week when, as an example, a young woman in San Francisco was viciously killed by a 5 time deported Mexican with a long criminal record, who was forced back into the United States because they didn’t want him in Mexico. This is merely one of thousands of similar incidents throughout the United States. In other words, the worst elements in Mexico are being pushed into the United States by the Mexican government. The largest suppliers of heroin, cocaine and other illicit drugs are Mexican cartels that arrange to have Mexican immigrants trying to cross the borders and smuggle in the drugs. The Border Patrol knows this. Likewise, tremendous infectious disease is pouring across the border. The United States has become a dumping ground for Mexico and, in fact, for many other parts of the world. On the other hand, many fabulous people come in from Mexico and our country is better for it. But these people are here legally, and are severely hurt by those coming in illegally. I am proud to say that I know many hard working Mexicans—many of them are working for and with me…and, just like our country, my organization is better for it.

The Mexican Government wants an open border as long as it’s a ONE WAY open border into the United States. Not only are they killing us at the border, but they are killing us on trade … and the country of Mexico is making billions of dollars in doing so.

I have great respect for Mexico and love their people and their peoples’ great spirit. The problem is, however, that their leaders are far smarter, more cunning, and better negotiators than ours. To the citizens of the United States, who I will represent far better than anyone else as President, the Mexican government is not our friend…and why should they be when the relationship is totally one sided in their favor on both illegal immigration and trade. I have pointed this out during my speeches and it is something Mexico doesn’t want me to say. In actuality, it was only after my significant rise in the polls that Univision, previously my friend, went ballistic. I believe that my examples of bad trade deals for the United States was of even more concern to the Mexican government than my talk of border security.

I have lost a lot during this Presidential run defending the people of the United States. I have always heard that it is very hard for a successful person to run for President. Macy’s, NBC, Serta and NASCAR have all taken the weak and very sad position of being politically correct even though they are wrong in terms of what is good for our country. Univision, because 70% of their business comes from Mexico, in my opinion, is being dictated to by the Mexican Government. The last thing Mexico wants is Donald Trump as President in that I will make great trade deals for the United States and will have an impenetrable border--only legally approved people will come through easily.

Interestingly, Univision has just announced they are attempting to go public despite very poor and even negative earnings, which is not a good situation for a successful IPO or high stock price—not to mention that I am currently suing them for breach of contract. Remember, Univision is the one who began this charade in the first place, and they are owned by one of Hillary Clinton’s biggest backers.

After the speech was made, there were numerous compliments and indeed, many rave “reviews”—there was very little criticism. It wasn’t until a week after my announcement that people started to totally distort these very easy to understand words. If there was something stated incorrectly, it would have been brought up immediately and with great enthusiasm.

The issues I have addressed, and continue to address, are vital steps to Make America Great Again! Additionally, I would be the best jobs President that God ever created. Let’s get to work!

Joementum
May 23, 2004

jesus christ
I checked it out and you don't need to know any of them.

Agrajag
Jan 21, 2006

gat dang thats hot
Trump must've had some kind of stroke or is going a bit senile to be doubling down so hard on this poo poo. Just reading one paragraph of the rant makes my head hurt. Unless he is some kind of genius and he is conducting some kind of elaborate honeypot scheme to out all the racists and bigots.

Supraluminal
Feb 17, 2012
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/bobby-jindal-greece-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-119769.html?hp=l5_4

quote:

Jindal: Clinton and Sanders would turn America into Greece

One need only look to Greece to see how a Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders presidency would turn out, Bobby Jindal wrote Monday.

You see, it's funny because actually the neoliberal policies of :suicide:

Nissin Cup Nudist
Sep 3, 2011

Sleep with one eye open

We're off to Gritty Gritty land




Joementum posted:

Moreso, actually. Nixon and Eisenhower's kids married.

When did the kids marry? Was it before or after Eisenhower and Nixon had an established relationship?

De Nomolos
Jan 17, 2007

TV rots your brain like it's crack cocaine
Re: going after states beyond the Obama 2012 ones...

It's always a good idea, if you're think you have a good shot, to go into some marginal states because of Senate seats. The Obama investment in NC in 2008 wasn't necessary to win the presidency, but it snagged a tough Senate seat. That may be the case next year in NC, IN, MO, and AZ. None of those seats are needed, but it could make a difference in how much damage can be absorbed in the inevitable 2018 drop-off.

The past 8 years should show anyone how every single Senate seat counts.

Joementum
May 23, 2004

jesus christ

DOOP posted:

When did the kids marry? Was it before or after Eisenhower and Nixon had an established relationship?

December, 1968. Also, I mis-stated it a bit. It was Ike's grandson and Dick's daughter.

Zwabu
Aug 7, 2006

Is it possible for we, the posters in this thread, to set up some kind of NCAA style pool of the primary outcomes? Points awarded to correctly picking the order in which people concede or drop out, correctly picking the last candidate standing etc., with increasing points awarded in the later rounds?

There should be some kind of bonus for correctly picking the first person to drop out though.

Then for the general election, for those who correctly chose the candidates in the contest, there should be points based on how close to the EV totals they come, and picking the specific states correctly.

MaxxBot
Oct 6, 2003

you could have clapped

you should have clapped!!

JT Jag posted:

Calling them angry freakouts is a mite excessive. A lot of people in this thread are going to vote for Bernie in the primary and hope he does well. Some of those same people are irked by "Bernie or No One" sentiment.

Obviously "Bernie or No One" is idiotic but I don't understand the people who say that Bernie would be a bad president because he wouldn't be able to get anything done due to being significantly left of the American political center. By that logic it would seem like Hillary would be a great choice, yet I haven't seen anyone standing up and defending Hillary is a great candidate. If Bernie is too far left to be a good president yet Hillary is also bad what do you want?

Mister Facetious
Apr 21, 2007

I think I died and woke up in L.A.,
I don't know how I wound up in this place...

:canada:

Nintendo Kid posted:

What about it dude? 10,000 people will come out for fuckin high school football if you live somewhere lovely enough.

Can you buy junk food at a primary speech? I don't think so.

True Believers ™ :smugbert:

loving android

Mister Facetious fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Jul 6, 2015

De Nomolos
Jan 17, 2007

TV rots your brain like it's crack cocaine

MaxxBot posted:

Obviously "Bernie or No One" is idiotic but I don't understand the people who say that Bernie would be a bad president because he wouldn't be able to get anything done due to being significantly left of the American political center. By that logic it would seem like Hillary would be a great choice, yet I haven't seen anyone standing up and defending Hillary is a great candidate. If Bernie is too far left to be a good president yet Hillary is also bad what do you want?

Hillary is just enough in the mainstream
while having progressive impulses of economic issues to not just win, but come closest to an actual governing majority that can take another run at climate legislation and immigration reform.

There you go.

Mr Ice Cream Glove
Apr 22, 2007

MaxxBot posted:

Obviously "Bernie or No One" is idiotic but I don't understand the people who say that Bernie would be a bad president because he wouldn't be able to get anything done due to being significantly left of the American political center. By that logic it would seem like Hillary would be a great choice, yet I haven't seen anyone standing up and defending Hillary is a great candidate. If Bernie is too far left to be a good president yet Hillary is also bad what do you want?

I've been seeing a lot of "if it is Jeb I won't vote"

Kalman
Jan 17, 2010

MaxxBot posted:

Obviously "Bernie or No One" is idiotic but I don't understand the people who say that Bernie would be a bad president because he wouldn't be able to get anything done due to being significantly left of the American political center. By that logic it would seem like Hillary would be a great choice, yet I haven't seen anyone standing up and defending Hillary is a great candidate. If Bernie is too far left to be a good president yet Hillary is also bad what do you want?

Hillary is pretty good too. People just think she isn't because they don't actually understand her positions, or are single issue voters solely on specific aspects of foreign policy.

Raskolnikov38
Mar 3, 2007

We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

MaxxBot posted:

Obviously "Bernie or No One" is idiotic but I don't understand the people who say that Bernie would be a bad president because he wouldn't be able to get anything done due to being significantly left of the American political center. By that logic it would seem like Hillary would be a great choice, yet I haven't seen anyone standing up and defending Hillary is a great candidate. If Bernie is too far left to be a good president yet Hillary is also bad what do you want?

No democrat president is going to get anything done with a republican congress anyway.

fade5
May 31, 2012

by exmarx

Evil Fluffy posted:

Doubtful. There's nothing gained by having any of those people as VP. The reason I keep mentioning Julian Castro is because he checks off a lot of boxes Hilary doesn't as he's a young, charismatic, Hispanic politician and if he wants to be President one day then she (and Bill) get to potentially play Kingmaker with him when she leaves office and he runs. Isn't Terry Mac also toxic as gently caress? Why would Clinton want someone like him as her VP? It'd be like Jeb getting the nomination and deciding to go back to Florida to pick Voldemort for his VP.
No he is not, actually TMac's doing pretty drat good:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016-elections/why-hillary-clinton-still-needs-terry-mcauliffe-20150624

quote:

McAuliffe's journey to the governor's mansion has been an odd one. The man who wore a Hawaiian shirt on television, who was linked to some of President Bill Clinton's more unsavory fundraising practices, who had been dismissed as a glorified salesman, now holds the title that once belonged to Thomas Jefferson.

Particularly in the final days of McAuliffe's gubernatorial campaign, when Bill Clinton barnstormed the state with him, McAuliffe held up Clinton's presidency as a governance model he hoped to emulate in Richmond.

McAuliffe didn't just manage—albeit on his second try—to become governor. He's managed to make voters like him. Multiple polls taken this year have pegged his approval rating around 50 percent; Virginians who think he's doing a good job roughly outnumber those who don't by a 2-1 margin.
--
Robby Mook, who ran McAuliffe's campaign, is now doing the same for Clinton. Brynne Craig, who served as McAuliffe's political director, has been on Clinton's staff for more than a year. Michael Halle, who guided turnout operations as head of the Virginia coordinated campaign in 2013, is now working for Clinton in Iowa along with three other McAuliffe alums: Michelle Kleppe, Lenora Hanks, and Kate Cummings. McAuliffe 2013 and Clinton 2016 also share a spokesman, Josh Schwerin, plus several more researchers and digital staffers.

Those advisers, particularly Mook, helped McAuliffe run a far more effective campaign than he did in 2009, and perhaps they can do the same for Clinton in her own second effort. McAuliffe has changed in ways that might be instructive to his friend. He appears to be more organized, more disciplined, and (slightly) less caffeinated.

"You've got to go through this process," he said, adding that this time around, "she is going to be a totally different candidate."
Terry McAuliffe won the race for Virgina governor in 2013. Admittedly he was up against a completely insane religious nutcase, but he still won an election as a Democrat in an off-off year election.

There are many things I am worried about for 2016. Virginia is not one of them: it will go blue with a small but comfortable margin, and TMac is going to make sure of it. Not as Clinton's VP pick, but from his position as Virginia Governor.

fade5 fucked around with this message at 00:09 on Jul 7, 2015

Nessus
Dec 22, 2003

After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!



Kalman posted:

Hillary is pretty good too. People just think she isn't because they don't actually understand her positions, or are single issue voters solely on specific aspects of foreign policy.
I think a lot of it is a depressing sign of the success of the Republican anti-Clinton strategy. I swear, they must have appeared in some prophecy for them to be so dedicated to demolishing them - well, OK, no, it'd have happened to any Democrat in the White House.

Fuck You And Diebold
Sep 15, 2004

by Athanatos
quote of the day?

quote:

Statement from Donald J. Trump:

I don’t see how there is any room for misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the statement I made on June 16th during my Presidential announcement speech. Here is what I said, and yet this statement is deliberately distorted by the media:

“When Mexico (meaning the Mexican Government) sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you (pointing to the audience). They’re not sending you (pointing again). They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems to us. They’re bringing drugs.They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people! But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting. And it only makes common sense. They’re sending us not the right people. It’s coming from more than Mexico. It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably from the Middle East. But we don’t know. Because we have no protection and we have no competence, we don’t know what’s happening. And it’s got to stop and it’s got to stop fast.”

What can be simpler or more accurately stated? The Mexican Government is forcing their most unwanted people into the United States. They are, in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc. This was evident just this week when, as an example, a young woman in San Francisco was viciously killed by a 5 time deported Mexican with a long criminal record, who was forced back into the United States because they didn’t want him in Mexico. This is merely one of thousands of similar incidents throughout the United States. In other words, the worst elements in Mexico are being pushed into the United States by the Mexican
government.
The largest suppliers of heroin, cocaine and other illicit drugs are Mexican cartels that arrange to have Mexican immigrants trying to cross the borders and smuggle in the drugs. The Border Patrol knows this. Likewise, tremendous infectious disease is pouring across the border. The United States has become a dumping ground for Mexico and, in fact, for many other parts of the world. On the other hand, many fabulous people come in from Mexico and our country is better for it. But these people are here legally, and are severely hurt by those coming in illegally. I am proud to say that I know many hard working Mexicans—many of them are working for and with me…and, just like our country, my organization is better for it.

The Mexican Government wants an open border as long as it’s a ONE WAY open border into the United States. Not only are they killing us at the border, but they are killing us on trade … and the country of Mexico is making billions of dollars in doing so.

I have great respect for Mexico and love their people and their peoples’ great spirit. The problem is, however, that their leaders are far smarter, more cunning, and better negotiators than ours. To the citizens of the United States, who I will represent far better than anyone else as President, the Mexican government is not our friend…and why should they be when the relationship is totally one sided in their favor on both illegal immigration and trade. I have pointed this out during my speeches and it is something Mexico doesn’t want me to say. In actuality, it was only after my significant rise in the polls that Univision, previously my friend, went ballistic. I believe that my examples of bad trade deals for the United States was of even more concern to the Mexican government than my talk of border security.

I have lost a lot during this Presidential run defending the people of the United States. I have always heard that it is very hard for a successful person to run for President. Macy’s, NBC, Serta and NASCAR have all taken the weak and very sad position of being politically correct even though they are wrong in terms of what is good for our country. Univision, because 70% of their business comes from Mexico, in my opinion, is being dictated to by the Mexican Government. The last thing Mexico wants is Donald Trump as President in that I will make great trade deals for the United States and will have an impenetrable border--only legally approved people will come through easily.

Interestingly, Univision has just announced they are attempting to go public despite very poor and even negative earnings, which is not a good situation for a successful IPO or high stock price—not to mention that I am currently suing them for breach of contract. Remember, Univision is the one who began this charade in the first place, and they are owned by one of Hillary Clinton’s biggest backers. After the speech was made, there were numerous compliments and indeed, many rave “reviews”—there was very little criticism. It wasn’t until a week after my announcement that people started to totally distort these very easy to understand words. If there was something stated incorrectly, it would have been brought up immediately and with great enthusiasm.

The issues I have addressed, and continue to address, are vital steps to Make America Great Again! Additionally, I would be the best jobs President that God ever created. Let’s get to work!

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trumps-epic-statement-on-mexico-2015-7

Soonmot
Dec 19, 2002

Entrapta fucking loves robots




Grimey Drawer

Zaphod42 posted:

So loving awkward.

Gotta love how Chic-fil-a has gone from 'our CEO really likes God and we're closed on Sundays' to 'CHRISTIAN CHICKEN'

You'd think the right wing would rally around Church's Chicken instead :cheeky:

The average Church's serves too much dark meat for your average GOPer.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Job Truniht
Nov 7, 2012

MY POSTS ARE REAL RETARDED, SIR

I still wish for that scenario where Obama did an immigration speech at the US-Mexican border with a parade of immigrant workers, Taco Bell employees, a Mariachi band, and a Día de Muertos in the background and then come out and say "yep, those were all US citizens". Trump would go apeshit.

  • Locked thread